devout abstraction.* Dissatisfied with this belief, he next tried that of the Prádhánikas, or worshippers of "universal nature" as the sole First Cause of all things. This atheistical doctrine he also abandoned; and, in its stead, either invented or adopted the theistical Triad of Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha, in which Triad Buddha, or (( supreme intelligence," is the Creator of all things. "In the transcendental and philosophical sense, BUDDHA means MIND; DHARMMA, Matter; and SANGHA, the concretion of the two former in the sensible or phenomenal world. In a practical or religious sense, BUDDHA means the mortal author of this religion (Sákya); DHARMMA, his law; and SANGHA, the congregation of the faithful."†

8. But though the early Buddhists admitted the existence of a Supreme Being, they denied his providence, in the full belief that without his aid, and solely by their own efforts of Tapast and Dhyán, or Abstinence and Abstraction, they could win for themselves the "everlasting bliss" (Moksha) of absorption into the Divine Spirit.§

• So complete was the power of abstraction held to be, that the author of the Mahawanso (p. 262) gravely relates the following story:"This Raja (Dhátusena), at the time he was improving the Kálawápi tank, observed a certain priest absorbed in the Samádhi meditation; and, not being able to rouse him from that abstraction, had him buried under the embankment (of the tank) by heaping earth over him." + Hodgson, p. 39.

Hodgson, page 35. The Tapas of the Buddhists was not penance, or self-inflicted bodily pain, like that of the Brahmans, but a perfect rejection of all outward things (pravrittika). § Hodgson, p. 37.

9. One belief common to Buddhism is the doctrine of Nirvritti and Pravritti, or Rest and Action.* The latter state is that of MAN, and the former that of the celestial, self-existent BEING, whether Buddha or Dharma. According to the Aiswárikas, the Supreme Being Adi Buddha, or Iswara, though formless as a cypher or mathematical point, and separate from all things (in Nirvritti), is infinite in form, pervading all, and one with all (in Pravritti).† His proper and lasting state is that of Nirvritti, but for the sake of creation, he spontaneously roused himself into activity (Pravritti), and by means of his five spiritual faculties (Panchajnyána), and by five exertions of mental reflection (Panchadhyana), he created the Pancha-Dhyani-Buddha, or "five celestial Buddhas," together with the "five elements," the "five senses," and the five "objects of sense," in the following order:

+ Hodgson, pp. 81, 40, 110. These terms were also applied to human beings, according as they passed secular or monastic lives. Thus Sákya, while Prince Siddharta, was exercising PravrittiMárga; but when he adopted the religious garb, and the devotional abstraction of the ascetics, he was then in a state of Nirvritti-Márga. Hodgson, pp. 40, 83, 111.

10. These five celestial Buddhas appear to be simple personifications of the five elements, and their inherent properties; or, to use Mr. Hodgson's expression, "of the active and intellectual powers of nature." The five Bodhisatwas, as well as the five Lokeswaras, or inferior celestials, likewise possessed Saktis.

11. I omit the long train of Bodhisatwas, Lokeswaras, and Buddhasáktis, as I believe that they formed no part of original Buddhism, but were engrafted afterwards when the religion of Sákya had become firmly established, and when its votaries took more delight in the indolent enjoyment of metaphysical speculations than in the active exertions of propagandism. I believe also that, as Buddhism gradually obtained an ascendancy over men's minds, the whole of the Bráhmanical schools, by an easy change of phraseology, accommodated their own doctrines so as not to clash with those of the dominant party. At least it is only by a supposition of this kind that I can account for the great similarity which exists between the philosophical systems of Buddhism and those of the Bráhmanical Sánkhyas. This similarity, which has already been noticed by Colebrooke,* is, indeed, so great as to render it difficult to discriminate the doctrines of the one from those of the other. The phraseology varies, but the ideas are the same; so that there is a distinction, but without a difference.

* Colebrooke, Trans. Roy. As. Society, vol. i. p. 19-On the Philosophy of the Hindus.

12. There is, however, one doctrine of the Sánkhyas, which neatly and clearly distinguishes them from the Buddhists - a belief in the eternity of matter, as well as in the immortality of the soul. The Sankhyas asserted that nothing can be produced which does not already exist; and that effects are educts and not products.* This is the old classical dogma of ex nihilo nil fit, "from nothing, nothing can come." The stately tree sprang from a seed; the costly jar was formed from the potter's clay. There might be infinities of form and ever-varying combinations of substance; but the materials existed before, and the difference consisted only in the shape and mixture, and not in the matter.

13. The orthodox Buddhists, on the contrary, believed that every thing was the creation of the self-existent Adi Buddha, who willed it, and it

was.

14. The Sankhya teachers, whose doctrines correspond with those of the primitive Buddhists, are Kapila and Patanjali. The first held that all things owed their origin to Mula-Prakriti, or Radical Nature, in which Purusha, or Soul, was inherent, and from which Budhi, or Intelligence (in a female and inferior form), was brought forth. His system

Colebrooke, Trans. Roy. As. Society, vol. i. p. 38-On the Philosophy of the Hindus.

+ This is the doctrine of Lucretius, de Rerum Natura-Nil fieri ex nihilo, in nihilum nil posse reverti. "From nonentity nothing can be produced; and entity cannot be reduced to nothing."

was called Niriswara Sánkhya,* or " atheistical Sánkhya," because he denied the existence of an all-ruling Providence. Kápila also prohibited sacrifice, as its practice was attended with the taking away of life.

15. The followers of Patanjali were called Seswara Sankhyas,† or "theistical Sánkhyas," because they recognised a Supreme Being who was the ruler of the world, infinite and eternal.

16. The Brahmanical Niriswara system agrees very nearly with that of the Buddhistical Swabháva, in which Dharma is made the first person of the Triad, as Mahá-Prajna,‡ or supreme nature," which is Swabhava (or self-existent), the sole entity, from which all things proceeded in this order §:

17. From the mystic root of the letter Y air

In the Swabhávaka Triad, Dharma is repre

Nir, without, and Iswara, God- that is, Godless or Atheistical.

+ Sa, with; Iswara, God.

↑ Hodgson, p. 77.

Hodgson, p. 109. These are the Sanskrit radicals,-ya, ra, va, la, which signify air, fire, water, and earth. From Mount Sumeru proceeded all trees and vegetables, and from the earth proceeded the Dhátwátmika, or bases of all the metals.